Cahiers du Cinéma

You need a lineup.

You need like, well, I mean, it's a little crude, but in Cahiers du Cinéma, for years and years and years, they ran a box with like positive or negative judgments from like... 18 or 24 film critics.

So you'd see like, oh, yeah, they all like Django Returns.

I got to check that out.

But I love this movie.

I think I might be in kind of like some combination of like the Cahiers du Cinema, like Galaxy Brain, calling Norbit the best movie of the year sort of like headspace.

Some combination of that and when someone is, like, such an alcoholic that they start drinking antifreeze, because, like, nothing that's legally consumable, like, does the trick anymore.

So I think I'm so deep in Clint that I need this level of one take, and did he know that part stayed in the movie? And it's just...

I think he

did direct that as well.

Richard Jewell... 1517 to Paris, again in the Cahiers du Cinema galaxy brain mode.

And then Perfect World is pretty undeniable.

And I think with, with Brad Bird especially, yeah, Iron Giant and Incredibles, they feel like they're made by the same person, and this appeals to a certain kind of like cinephile sensibility, which does privilege the, um, the, the mark of the auteur.

And, and it g- goes back to that, that old like Cahiers du Cinema thing of like cinema feels more valid as an art form if we can pinpoint an individual artist behind those films.

Again, rightly or wrongly, I think a lot of people kind of subconsciously feel that way.

Um, so I think being able to point at Incredibles and say, "Look, this is very clearly a film by the same person who made this-" ...

All of them being doused with kerosene.

We see books by Charlie Chaplin, Brendan Behan, We see Cahiers du Cinema, the film journal that Truffaut wrote for.

They give the woman 10 seconds to get out of her house, and they begin a 10-second countdown.

She refuses to move.

Terrific reviews.

Um, one of these movies, again, foreign-wise, I always mispronounce this, Cahiers du Cinema, whatever that, that international magazine.

The best movie of 1993.

One of the greatest movies of all time, they have it ranked at the end of the century.

But there were defenders.

In France, the critics at Cahiers du Cinéma named it one of the best films of the year.

It wouldn't properly reach American audiences for some 15 years.

After A King in New York, Chaplin made no new film for almost a decade.

Brilliant, brilliant.

And also to all those who say criticism is pointless and, you know, it doesn't do anyone anything and films can exist without critics, is Cahiers du Cinéma and André Bazin, people like him, who actually brought so many of these movies of obscurity and were completely ignored elsewhere for years and years and years and revived them and gave them kind of like... raison d'être gave them this kind of freshness and people to see them from different ways you know like they did the same for like the the man who shot liberty balance they did that for all those westerns you know so i think criticism is important when it's done properly you know

Yes, yes.

Had I had more time, I'd have mentioned that as well, yes, because there was a piece of my notes about Jean-Paul Sartre and Georges Sadu, who basically destroyed it in their criticism, and it was Bazin who saved it and brought it back to people.

Alfred Hitchcock and Howard Hawks.

At cafes, after screenings, and in the pages of the film magazine Cahiers du Cinéma, Schroeder and his pals sang their praises endlessly.

In fact...

They get caricatured as Hitchcock-Oxians, so Hitchcock-O-Hoxians, right? So it's not just that they like Hollywood, but in particular, Hitchcock and Hawks.